No Wind Beneath Our Wings: The Problematic SG/SF Situation
by LoveTo on Aug 17, 2009 2:03 AM CDT
Email
PrintThe Wolves are a team that, for the long term, appears to be set at point guard (I would call it unlikely that both Rubio and Flynn will bust) and in the post (assuming, of course, that Love and Jefferson can play together). They've got at least one dynamic point guard and two excellent post players plugged into their roster long-term.
Where they are extraordinarily weak, however, is on the wings. Below the jump, let's look at what they have there right now, what the Contending Wolves of Three Years Hence will need on the wings, and how to bridge that gap.
We all know that the Wolves are probably the worst team in the NBA at the shooting guard and small forward positions. I actually thought about this, and I don't think there is a crummier team at those two positions. There are five players who you'd call "wings" on the team: Corey Brewer, Ryan Gomes, Wayne Ellington, Brian Cardinal, and Damien Wilkins. The last two may see some spot duty for the Wolves this year, but either or both could be gone at the trade deadline, and neither will be a member of the Contending Wolves of Three Years Hence.
So we'll discuss the other three. The bottom line is that any starting 2/3s on the Contending Wolves of Three Years Hence need to be athletic. David Kahn wants to run, and both Ricky Rubio and Jonny Flynn will be at their best flying around, whipping passes to people flying around with them. As it stands, the Wolves are an unathletic team. Assuming that eventually Rubio becomes the starting point guard (not an entirely safe assumption, by the way), the starting 1, 4, and 5 will be occupied by skilled but relatively unathletic --by NBA standard-- players. There needs to be athleticism on the team, which hopefully will come in the form of Flynn, Hollins (or whoever we draft to fill his theoretical role) and the starting 2 and 3. Here are the three 2/3 players who may have a future with the team, and how they'll fit.
Corey Brewer -- Brewer is somewhat of a frustrating case. Because, in theory, he is the perfect small forward for this current roster. When playing well, Brewer's length and quickness make him an awesome perimeter defender. Even when playing well, he doesn't need to -- or flat out can't -- create his own offense, or handle the ball. And a somewhat underrated aspect of Brewer's game is his ability to hit spot-up jumpers. If he reaches his potential, Brewer would fit wonderfully alongside Rubio/Flynn. He'd defend well, get out and finish on the break, maybe spot up for open fast-break threes, and get the hell out of the way in the halfcourt and let Rubio/Love or Flynn/Love work some pick and roll magic.
That makes it easy to overvalue Brewer. Because so far, he hasn't shown signs of being able to reach his potential. He often seems confused on the court, even in summer league. I realize he missed a lot of action with an ACL tear, but especially for someone with so little natural feel for the game, that's not a reason to dismiss shortcomings, but rather a reason to worry about more to come. I think Brewer should start and play heavy minutes this year (as painful as it could get to watch), because if he can "put it together," that could be another position locked up long-term in the starting line-up. Perhaps more likely, however, is that he won't make strides in his offensive game, and be made a limited-minutes defensive specialist, or simply released from the Contending Wolves of Three Years Hence.
Ryan Gomes -- In many ways, Gomes is the anti-Brewer. He's not frustrating because he isn't reaching his potential, but because he likely already has. Gomes is a pretty lunch-pail, predictable type of player. He's not an athlete, not a creator. But he is a steady, reliable mid-range jumpshooter whose range can sometimes extend to the three-point line. He's an average defender, but a pretty good rebounder. Basically, Gomes is an ideal 7th or 8th man, a backup forward who can space the floor, rebound, and exploit the occasional match-up against a slower, lumbering power forward who can't guard him 15 feet from the basket. That's what he is. Which is why I think Gomes should come off the bench this season. Don't get me wrong, he has done more to deserve to start than Brewer. But on the Contending Wolves of Three Years Hence, Brewer may be a starter. Gomes will not be. This season is about finding out who fits into what roles, and beginning to establish roles for the players who will be on the team in the long-term. Gomes will be a back-up when the Wolves are ready to contend. Might as well be one now, then. Brewer could be anywhere from starting to off the team. In order to figure out what we have in Brewer, Gomes has to come off the bench.
Wayne Ellington -- Ellington's hard to project because he's never played in an NBA game, obviously. But we know that he's a shooter who is fairly average in other aspects of the game. But that quality makes him a good fit for this roster, because along with athleticism, the 2 and 3 of the Contending Wolves need to provide jump-shooting and floor-spacing. If Ellington could prove to be a decent perimeter defender and a capable ball-handler, he also has a shot at starting long-term. More likely, I'd say, is that Ellington will be a valuable sniper off the bench for the Contending Wolves. He's not the long, rangy athlete that is an important component to the line-up. That said, I think he should start at the 2 this year for the same reasons as Corey.
If what I've said in this post is right, the wing rotation on The Contending Wolves of Three Years Hence might shake out like this: A 6'8 or taller explosive athlete whose best attributes are his defense, shooting, and ability to finish in transition at both the starting 2 and the 3. If Brewer makes strides towards becoming an adequate ball-handler (to the point where he's not a liability) plus continues to improve his jumpshot, he could be one of those two. If not, he won't be on the team. Ellington and Gomes will be the back-ups at both positions, each bringing good spot-up shooting that would complement either of the starters well.
Thoughts?
45 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Gerald Green and/or Rodney Carney...
I voted for Ellington/Brewer; however, I would still like to see the Wolves pick up Green AND Carney for compete for the 2/3 spot. Both are athletic, can shoot from deep, are young, and I think still have potential…plus they won’t cost much. I think Green’s potential is higher if we sign just one, but I would like to sign both and give them some starting time as well. Between Ellington, Green, Carney, and Brewer I think one would develop into the long term starter and another the backup.
Green's had potential for years
His first Wolves stint was painful to watch because he had no concept of playing within an offense.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Aug 17, 2009 5:03 PM CDT up reply actions
Leaving alone his defense
Gerald at least had some positive qualities offensively. On defense, the comparisons to McGrady were even less apropos. T-Mac started out playing a defensive role, in Toronto, once upon a time. Green, not so much.
It strikes me that there is a more than nil possibility
that none of the 3 guys you wrote about will be on the contending Wolves team of 3 years hence. My guess is that Ellington will still be around (as a spot guy off the bench). I doubt the other 2 are around.
Brewer—I’m now of the opinion that they will not exercise his option for 2010-11 in order to increase their cap space. That doesn’t mean they can’t resign him, but he certainly could be gone after one more season. Frankly, I have very little confidence in him. He is just so lacking in court awareness, in addition to the skills stuff he lacks.
Gomes—I’d be shocked if they didn’t waive him after the year for more cap space. The next 3 years on his deal are only partially guaranteed. I have mixed feelings about this. Gomes would make a good 7th-8th guy, but I understand not wanting to lock in money for your 7th-8th guy before you’ve figured out your first 5 guys and what they will cost.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 17, 2009 8:31 AM CDT reply actions
+1
The only way we get significant cap space (over $10M) next Summer is by getting rid of Songaila or Gomes. Both is we sign Rubio and 2 Rookies. Declining Oily and/or Brewer gets us close to/past a max offer. So, if Songaila is not moved, Gomes will almost certainly be bought out, barring something dramatic like an Al trade of course. Gomes is a nice player and a good guy, maybe he’ll stick around to mentor and be a pro for the young guys.
(678): Words of Wisdom: ordering a pitcher of whiskey cokes, putting a straw in it, and calling it your drink is not socially acceptable
Gomes' problem
is that he was pegged as a role player before the team found most of their starters. Which is fine if you are on your rookie deal and your team gets its starters before your contract ends, but you don’t lock up your money into the role player before you get a starting 5. =>He will get waived if the wolves want to make a max offer…otherwise traded to a team that wants to waive him for the instant salary cap relief.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 17, 2009 11:50 AM CDT up reply actions
Brewer clarification
I generally agree with your overall sentiment here, except on the Brewer court awareness thing….I think he generally has wonderful court awareness, especially on defense. He’s also a very solid passer and rebounder. It’s on the offensive skills side that he’s a train wreck – his handles, ability to adjust his shot in traffic and absorb contact, and of course his jump shot.
by Rascal Flatts on Aug 17, 2009 6:30 PM CDT up reply actions
Brewer
David Thorpe Summed it up best “Off-Ball Dynamo, On-Ball Train-Wreck”.
by Jose Cordoba on Aug 17, 2009 10:00 PM CDT up reply actions
Hard to tell
I voted for Ellington-Brewer, because as Kahn-y boy said, if you’re going to go young for player development, well, you gotta go young.
I think Ellington will be a much better player than most predict. He’ll be the type of guy that in 5-6 years will be in huge demand among contending teams for what he offers. Does that make him a starter or a sixth man? I don’t know, but in my mind it makes him no worse than the #6 guy on your team.
Brewer and Gomes—I think Kahn is taking the right approach with them. He said earlier that he was going to wait and see what they did this year because he doesn’t know yet how or if they’ll fit on this team three years hence. With Kool-Aid in hand I have hope that Rambis can help Brewer discover consistency and rediscover the form and talent that had DraftExpress rate him as the best (or second best) SF prospect of his draft class. Without the Kool-Aid I think Brewer is walking a very thin line in regards to staying on this team.
Gomes has a lot of value on this team, especially as a productive player with a partially guaranteed contract over the next number of years. He won’t be cut, and he won’t be traded for peanuts (although the QRich deal has me second guessing that). He’s the perfect trade throw-in for a team giving up a good to really good player because Gomes can actually play, and he can play in any system.
Green? Dear god no. I’d love to have Carney back for a season of Rambis—there’s ability there. See thoughts on Brewer and Rambis.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
Green...
I am not saying Green is DWade, but between him and Carney I would go with Green. He is younger, longer, more athletic, and shoots better from the line and about the same from 3 and the field, plus he can create his own shot (I live in Dallas now and have actually seen him play. He can light it up). With a new coach and Twolves atmosphere, I think he is a worth the inexpensive look. He still has a lot more upside than Brewer, Carney, or even Ellington IMHO, and he can play the 2 or 3.
Ya
I just think the writing’s on the wall for a guy who’s bounced around as much as he has. He’s already been here once—why will he be any better the second time around? Green, up to this point, has been the biggest tease of the NBA—All world athleticism and the ability to just dominate, and yet the guy can’t buy a career on just one team nor a starting job (let alone meaningful rotation role). I don’t deny all those things that you say, I’d just add to them “Hasn’t ever been able to put it together at the NBA level, at least up to this point.”
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Aug 17, 2009 12:04 PM CDT up reply actions
I know, but ...
As a rookie he played behind Gomes, Pierce, Davis and West. Same guys his soph year minus Davis. For the 29 games we had him, he competed with Foye, Gomes, McCants, Jaric, Buckner, and Brewer ( his numbers and scoring cut in half as we had our own picks/guys to play already and we had a lot of guards and a bad coach/GM). His one game in Houston he was behind Batier, McGrady, Wells, etc. and I am sure he was not really part of their long term plans so why develop him there either. Last year in Dallas (Dallas always think they are in the hunt for a championship and probably not concerned with getting Green game time and development) he competed with Terry, Stack, Howard, George, Carrol and Barea. I definitely see your points, but we are rebuilding and have a chance to add a really athletic and potentially prolific scorer for not much money who could get a real shot at playing time and development and who may turn into a guy who could be a legit starter. If he doesn’t work out I don’t think it will cost us much, but this may be the first time he really has a chance to be part of the offence with serious minutes, and he does still have a big upside I think.
Why not toss him a 1 yr vet min
contract? I hope we don’t need wilkins to play and I definitely don’t want Gomes/Cardinal playing SF. If you are going to suck…then by all means suck. Perhaps all he has ever needed was sufficient playing time and coaching. If you aren’t necessarily trying to win, you might as well use games as a learning opportunity. It may actually make them more fun to watch. He can definitly run.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 17, 2009 12:44 PM CDT up reply actions
Knife cuts both ways
Ya, if you’re going to go young, might as well go all the way. It just worries me that he wasn’t able to catch enough attention in practice and games to warrant more playing time over McCants, Jric, Buckner, and Brewer (don’t know the other teams’ guys that well). To use a baseball metaphor, Green strikes me as a thrower, not a pitcher. NBA history is stacked against him (how many super athletic kids have we seen come out too early, have lots of ‘tools’ but not know how to play the game, bounce around a bit while teams what for them to ‘get it’, etc etc.) I just think that between Green and Carney, Carney already knows our guys and has shown me more last year that he has the chance to be a nice all around player off the bench. (And let’s be honest here—we’re talking about both of these players aspiring to become solid bench contributors and nothing more—the starting ship has long sailed for these two).
I hear both of you, I guess I my preference is for the guy that already knows our guys, and not the one working on a fourth or fifth team in four years.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
When he gets minutes, though...
All he does is go 1v1. It cuts both ways: he’d get minutes if he showed any semblance of understanding how to play with teammates or play defense. He could’ve beaten out Gomes or West or Tony Allen or McCants or Buckner or Brewer, but he didn’t. The kid started 26 games his 2nd year with the Celtics and played 22 mpg, so he had chances, and he would’ve played here if he’d shown more because McCants and Brewer weren’t sacred cows by any means.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Aug 17, 2009 5:13 PM CDT up reply actions
About Green...
I am really not trying to say I think he is some huge answer to our problems at the 2/3 nor am I saying that I about Carney. I like Carney. I think they are currently almost the same player although I give a slight edge to Green, and I think Green still has better upside and potential over Carney. I think Carney is what he is, and Green could still become something. I am not sure what Green’s ceiling is but while we are rebuilding why not try to see if he is a potential starter or better guy to come off the bench than Carney or ?. I don’t think Carney is ever going to be more than he is, and I think Green still has potential to be a starter in the NBA. Also, Green’s numbers weren’t bad when he started in Boston.
How long can we keep talking about GG’s potential before we realize he has about zero chance to act on it.. A cheap 1 year deal would be inconsequential in my eyes, so I’m not really arguing against it, but you’re in for disappointment if you think the kid is going to ever “get it.”
He has one of the worst bball IQ’s I’ve ever seen on both sides of the floor. All he does is chuck up pullup J’s out of the flow of the offense and get caught out of position defensivley. He’s the true antithesis to Brewer. If we could just find a way to give Green’s jumper to Cbrew we’d be set..
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
There's a bit of delicious irony in the holes at the 2-3
in that:
a. those two positions are where many of the Stars Who Win Championships play
b. as mentioned, these are by far the weakest areas of the roster
My guess is that Kahn will not invest big money into at least one of those positions until he finds his “#1 player on a good team” to fill it. How will that happen? I think he’ll draft one or two next year and hope that one gets good quickly. If and when that doesn’t occur, he’ll look around the league for a Garnett-type trade, swapping some combination of expirings, picks, Flynn, and a recently-drafted wing player for an established veteran 2-3 and a bad contract or two.
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
I think Kahn sees Rubio as his eventual “#1 on a good team.” And he’ll find wings that aren’t ball-dominant superstars like Kobe or LeBron, but athletes who can get up and down the floor and finish Rubio dishes.
Both of your scenarios
(scenaria?) are good. Rubio’s already almost on the roster, and the 2-3s you describe is a helluva lot more prevalent and available than Kobe or LeBron.
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
Agreed
If we keep Rubio and Flynn as part of a longer-term 3-guard rotation (with Flynn being a super-sub that can play on or off the ball), then we will hopefully be absolutely stacked in two areas: 1) Skilled posts in Jefferson and Love, and 2) Skilled playmakers in Rubio and Flynn. Just find a couple of wings cut from the Rodney Carney cloth, but better.
by Rascal Flatts on Aug 17, 2009 6:36 PM CDT up reply actions
If I had to breakdown the future wolves roster
with the players that we have, you have the starting 5 and the 6-7 spots. I think (with some major assumptions) that Rubio, Love, Jefferson can exist in the starting 5 at the 1, 4 and 5 spots, with the wolves needing 2/3 (They should get one of those in this upcoming draft) and Flynn/Ellington filling those 6-7 spots as a change of pace line-up. Depending on who is available as a C prospect in next year’s draft, I can see the wolves selecting 2 2/3 prospects in hopes that they both turn out and the wolves have their starting 5 or at least one pans out and they could acquire the missing piece via free agency.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 17, 2009 11:22 AM CDT reply actions
Brewer-Gomes
Not because I disagree with your logic. Mainly because I don’t think they want two rookies on the court that often. Flynn needs experienced players on the court with him to help his development. Ellington will be 15 MPG when they want someone shooting threes.
Kahn even said before the draft he did not want too many rookies playing, which is why he made the deal with Denver for a future first rounder.
I voted this way too
Because they have more experience and because I think they’ll each be as productive as or more productive than Ellington this season.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Aug 17, 2009 5:17 PM CDT up reply actions
I agree
Tough to wrest the SF slot away from Gomes. He’s a solid veteran that deserves to start. What if Rubio comes over and he starts at PG? That’s a pretty long starting lineup:
PG – Rubio – 6"3 with what appears to be a pretty long wingspan
SG – Brewer – 8"7 standing reach. Not freakish, but pretty long by SG standards.
SF – Gomes – Excellent size for a SF.
PF – Love – A bit short, but not Craig Smith territory.
C – Jefferson – 9"2 standing reach.
And with Ryan Hollins coming off the bench upfront and Wayne Ellington playing some 2, we’re suddenly not so challenged in terms of our overall team length.
by Rascal Flatts on Aug 17, 2009 6:46 PM CDT up reply actions
Length?
length isn’t an issue. . .if length = good basketball Manut Bol would be shack, and Cory Brewer would be Koby Bryant. . .
There are some little issues with the NBA (and the NFL) about what a position player should look like, and frankly it doesn’t matter. To if this “length” line up works, sick, but it’s not a big deal if we don’t have a stereotypical shooting guard, that’s super athletic. Ray Allen isn’t everywhere!
If Rubio shows, which he prolly won’t, then the back court will prolly be Flynn/Carney,Carney/Brewer/Gomes.
if not I wanna see Ellington/Carney, Carney/Brewer/Gomes
what about Pecherov off the bench to the three? mabey a zone D fence? could be interesting. . .
and what’s all this about Green? He still a Timberwolf? Did I miss something?
by MikeyBtha612g on Aug 17, 2009 11:56 PM CDT up reply actions
Obviously
length in and of itself is not as important as a player’s skill-set. But all else being equal, the longer the better. Teams have been able to go over the top of our squad pretty much at will the past couple of seasons, whether it’s a guard rising up for a jumper over the outstretched stubby arms of Telfair or Foye, or easily getting clear looks in the paint where the likes of earthbound bigs like Gomes, Love, and Smith have roamed. Hollins, Rubio, and and a healthy Brewer (at the 2, not the 3) gives us some length at their positions that we simply haven’t possessed the last couple of years. I think we could be a trainwreck offensively this season, but it wouldn’t surprise me if we ended up being a better defensive team than last year.
by Rascal Flatts on Aug 18, 2009 11:22 AM CDT up reply actions
I would just like to point out
that nobody considered Telfair and Foye to be good defensively, and that wasn’t only because of their size.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 18, 2009 11:31 AM CDT up reply actions
True
Foye, had poor reaction time laterally and quick guards could easily blow by him, whereas big guards could just shoot over him….not good. I thought last season Telfair did a little better staying in front of guys, so I didn’t see him as much of a liability defensively as some of our other players, but overall I see a ton more defensive potential in Rubio at PG, partially due to his length.
by Rascal Flatts on Aug 18, 2009 11:42 AM CDT up reply actions
The Eastern Conference Finals...
Showed what happens when length and mobility match up with guys who are either too short or too slow. Obviously, Orlando got hot and Cleveland went cold, but part of the problem was that Cleveland’s personnel didn’t match up with Orlando’s. Cleveland was the best team in the league, but it was obvious in that series that their schemes couldn’t mask the mismatches on both ends. In a lot of ways, it was the biggest argument in favor of having as much length as possible.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Aug 18, 2009 11:57 AM CDT up reply actions
Rudy Gay mayn
i thank aybody thinkin de same thnag: we need ta git rudy gay.
an dont complicate it eitha wit all dat “hes a volume shooter who dosent pass o play defense” mayn dass EXACTLY de type uv player i am mayn an im thowed u kno aldoe i do pass de rock i got sum ricky in me mayn but mah three pointa wayyyy too thowed so iss all good im like a yung mike miller cept i actually shoot yess shots fired mayn
an mayn yall realize right dat Gay could potentially be our 5th bess player??!?!?!?!?!? ouyr starting lineup uv rubio flynn gay love jefferson makes de playoss easy righ now!!!!!
aight mayn im boutta stay fiendin on dis milla lite mayn den spark dis spliff i juss rolled up mayn u alreddy kno how iss goin down in st pizzy mayn i luv life mayn juss chillin an stayin based mayn i hope yall doin de same im out wun!
MAYN HOL UP!
correction
rubio is 6’4 almost 6’5’’ kevin love is in smith territory, and inch taller to be exact at 6’ 7’’ in socks. if you notice in pitchers jefferson is a inch taller than love. we def need a defensive center at 7 plus,
brewer is garbage. good guy but sorry 8th man at best in this league.
by Twolves for ever and ever on Aug 18, 2009 1:01 AM CDT reply actions
I don't know why people
keep saying we need a 7 ft defensive center. We get more net production out of our frontcourt, not to mention rebounding then most other teams. Our downfall has been the poor perimeter D and offensive prowess of our guards. We had the worst PG net PER in the NBA last year, 3rd worst SF net PER and 11th worst SG PER.
So long as Love and Big Al can learn how to defend the PnR, we are fine in the frontcourt.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 18, 2009 6:47 AM CDT up reply actions
Because players defend with the top of their head, obviously.
I hate Pod Six. I don't even know why we have a Pod Six. Total suck pod.
by Kevin Loves McHale's Navy on Aug 18, 2009 9:24 AM CDT up reply actions
too often
the center argument comes down to the “mine’s bigger than yours is” belief. Hell, we might as well come up with some other random body comparison to “prove” either dominance or incompetence.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 18, 2009 10:52 AM CDT up reply actions
I have a new, non-family friendly, metric for comparing centers.
Would you like to hear it?
I hate Pod Six. I don't even know why we have a Pod Six. Total suck pod.
by Kevin Loves McHale's Navy on Aug 18, 2009 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions
all for it
Children…cover your eyes and ears.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 18, 2009 11:32 AM CDT up reply actions
In this metric, lets just say...
Chris Cooley shouldn’t quit his day job, Visanthe Shiancoe would be the median and Santonio Holmes should really consider lacing it up in the NBA.
I hate Pod Six. I don't even know why we have a Pod Six. Total suck pod.
by Kevin Loves McHale's Navy on Aug 18, 2009 12:07 PM CDT up reply actions
Also, links are likely NSFW.
I hate Pod Six. I don't even know why we have a Pod Six. Total suck pod.
by Kevin Loves McHale's Navy on Aug 18, 2009 12:09 PM CDT up reply actions
Smith is a generous 6’7 IN shoes…
Love is pretty much average for an NBA PF. He’s nowhere near Smith territory.
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
Smith: 6’5 1/2 w/o shoes
Love: 6’7 3/4 w/o shoes
Love has a similar advantage in standing reach (2 1/2 inches)
by pagingstanleyroberts on Aug 18, 2009 12:10 PM CDT up reply actions
I'm shocked
that the voters’ main consensus seems to be excluding Gomes from the lineup.
He started in 76 games for us last year when we had considerably more talent at the 2/3 in Miller, Foye, Carney, and some McCants and Brewer. Take away the two or three of those five, yet suddenly he’s getting pushed out?
I’m all for developing talent, but let’s be reasonable. Brewer has done nothing to warrant pushing out Gomes. 20-25 minutes/game over an entire season will be plenty of time for him to show us who he is.
The problem with Gomes
is that when you look at his stats from last year, you can tell that his effectiveness against other teams starters was subpar. On the other hand, he would add value to the team from the bench. Foye was not a 3. Miller did play alot (when he didn’t tweak his ankle), but he also played some 2. Gomes has never played the 2, only the 3/4. Brewer was injured…McCants is just a douche bag. Carney is athletic…but not a “ballplayer.” Gomes is at least a “ballplayer” but he just isn’t quite good enough. Don’t make him something he is not. I like gomes…I just like him coming off the bench so he can showcase how much better he is than other teams bench players.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 18, 2009 6:53 AM CDT up reply actions
Agree on the whole of your article. The only thing I’d like is another SG/SF behind Ellington/Gomes. Carney would be nice but probably can’t be had for what would be interesting for us to have him there.
If we can’t keep Gomes I’d like Carney instead because he fits a bit better in my mind. Though the contract would still be the problem..
We got Rubio!
How about another poll?
On which free agent wing they should add to a 1-yr deal
-Carney
-Green
-Both
-Neither
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Canis Hoopus
Related FanShots on Canis Hoopus
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Create-a-Caption: ‘Vengeance is mine,’ quoth Alvis
- Roy Hibbert wants to play for Team USA, seeks release from Jamaican national team
- Bucks forward Jon Brockman loves wearing adult onesies
- Andrew Bynum after 9-0 Thunder run beats Lakers: ‘We’re better than Santa Claus’
- Walter McCarty, former Celtics forward and Pacers coach, takes to the music industry
